For Better or Worse: This Is How AI Artist Botto is Transforming the Art Industry
- Tiffany Zang
- Jan 24
- 5 min read
The emergence of the AI artist Botto compels the industry to reevaluate the role of robots in creation and the future of artistic ownership.
For numerous years, the concept of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been regarded either as a potential menace to the workforce or as a miraculous remedy for an unbounded future. In the realm of art, the most recent AI advancement embodies elements of both. Established in 2021 by German artist Mario Klingemann and the software collaborative ElevenYellow, Botto is a "decentralized autonomous artist" that has garnered significant attention in the technology and art sectors by producing digital artworks that have sold for millions at auctions.
For ages, the creation of art has been regarded as an intrinsically human pursuit, motivated by individual brilliance, emotional profundity, and personal expression. As AI algorithms like as Botto become increasingly influential in the art industry, the fundamental notion of art and the identity of its creators are undergoing transformation. Botto's triumph in the art sector provokes inquiries regarding creativity, ownership, authenticity, and the future of the art industry.
A Novel Type of "Artist"
Similar to most AI systems, Botto's image production is prompted by stimuli. Botto generates around 70,000 images weekly, employing machine learning algorithms that analyze and synthesize data from art history, encompassing surrealism, cubism, and impressionism. Of the thousands, 350 are submitted to the DAO—Botto's "decentralized autonomous organization," consisting of 5,000 community members who vote on which image should be coined as an NFT and auctioned to the highest bidder. The revenues from the sale are distributed between the voters and Botto’s treasury, supporting the AI's continuous creative endeavors.
This process distinguishes Botto from other AI systems. Its designation as a decentralized artist enables the creative process to be influenced by both the computer and its human community—this aim, thus far, is a commitment that the DAO intends to uphold. The AI generates the photos, while the human participants of the DAO significantly affect the selection of artworks deemed worthy of auction. Simon Hudson, the operator of Botto, stated to CNBC, “Participation is necessary to assist in training Botto.”
Hudson elaborates that Botto's objective is both a quest for artistic acknowledgment and a means to achieve success in various forms. Hudson assesses an artist's success based on impact, both monetarily and culturally, while Botto has already challenged norms by eliminating obstacles to entry in the art community.
The Significance of AI-Generated Art
The commercial success of Botto's artworks is unequivocal. Wired reports that the AI artist has achieved sales exceeding USD 4 million, with one piece commanding over USD 1 million at auction. During an auction in October 2024, CNBC reported that two Botto artworks were sold for a total of USD 276,000 at Sotheby’s, indicating that Botto’s artistic contributions had garnered recognition among art collectors and investors. These sales prompt a fundamental inquiry: what is the authentic worth of AI-generated art?
Numerous opponents contend that AI is incapable of producing art with the emotional profundity or intentionality characteristic of human artists. Ted Chiang, an American science fiction author writing for The New Yorker, contends that AI-generated art lacks value as AI inherently cannot create art. Chiang asserts that “art is a product of decision-making,” a distinctly human method of cognition. Conversely, machines do not make decisions. They formulate forecasts based on existing data. This corresponds with a conventional perspective on art – that it should mirror human experiences and consciousness, and that computers are unable to create meaningful work due to their absence of emotions.
Supporters of AI art contend that the value of art, irrespective of its origin, resides in its process rather than the feelings it evokes. In response to Chiang's column in The New Yorker, Matteo Wong stated in The Atlantic that "the manner in which a model interrelates words, images, and knowledge across spatial and temporal dimensions could constitute a subject of art, or even a medium in its own right." Wong asserts that the artistic process is inherently collaborative, despite appearances to the contrary. Rather, it encompasses "societies, industries, and indeed, technologies." Hudson and Klingemann share a perspective akin to Wong's; they anticipate that Botto will transform the valuation of art. Hudson refers to this as a “meaning-making process,” in which humans direct the computer, and the machine subsequently reflects human ingenuity.
Botto exemplifies a novel perspective on art, wherein the artistic process holds equal significance to the end creation. The emergence of AI artists such as Botto may indicate the decline of the "solitary" artist archetype, paving the way for a future in which collaboration between people and technology influences the essence of art.
Artificial Intelligence Art and Proprietorship
Botto's success also contests the concept of ownership within the art sector. By democratizing the art creation process, Botto and the DAO facilitate new opportunities for engagement in the art realm, enabling anybody to influence the trajectory of the artwork through voting. This naturally prompts inquiries regarding authorship: Who possesses the artwork? Were the algorithms built by human creators? The community members who participated in the voting on the images? Or is it the machine itself that performed the creative process?
The truth is that there is no conclusive answer. At present, generative AI and its outputs are assessed individually. Author and illustrator Harry Woodgate stated to The Guardian, “These programs depend entirely on the pirated intellectual property of numerous working artists, photographers, illustrators, and other rights holders.” Despite the prevalence of this issue, the growing implementation of AI is facilitating the establishment of further systems. A Reuters story proposes that ownership claims about AI-generated artwork should be managed akin to items governed by open source or Creative Commons licenses. In some contexts, there are initiatives to embrace AI as a creative instrument, rather than vilify it. For example, Getty Images, which litigated against the London-based firm Stability AI in 2023, has now adopted the technology. The latest generative AI tool enables users to produce graphics derived from Getty's extensive archive of photographs and visuals. Getty CEO Craig Peters said AP News that revenue generated from AI photos would be distributed among the producers and contributors whose work served as the foundation for the AI.
This resembles the operation of Botto, wherein actively participating individuals receive "Botto tokens," granting them voting rights about the AI's output. Thus, DAO members are not merely passive art consumers; they are essential to the artistic process, engaging actively in collective decision-making. Botto signifies a future of art that transcends conventional limitations of ownership and creativity. It is an artistic ecosystem that operates in a digital, decentralized environment, where community-driven decisions influence the trajectory of the work. The DAO concept exemplifies the operational dynamics of numerous contemporary digital communities, prioritizing collaboration and collective ownership above individual control.
Art in the Contemporary Era
The ongoing discourse over AI in art remains unresolved; yet, Botto's success indicates a growing acceptance of technology as a valid medium for artistic expression. Botto is transforming the art-making process and disrupting the conventional art market structure by integrating machine learning algorithms with community involvement. The permanence of Botto's success as either a transient trend or the onset of a significant technological transformation is yet to be determined. The emergence of AI in the art realm constitutes a philosophical revolution, confronting enduring concerns that have troubled the industry since its inception: What is the essence of art, and who possesses the authority to produce it? Botto is neither the inaugural disruptor in the art realm nor will it be the final one.
Commentaires